--- Sean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The question is: why not just extend SELinux to include AA functionality > rather than doing a whole new subsystem. Because, as hard as it seems for some people to believe, not everyone wants Type Enforcement. SELinux is a fine implementation of type enforcement, but if you don't want what it does it would be silly to require that it be used in order to accomplish something else, like name based access control. If the same things made everyone feel "secure" there would be no optional security facilities (audit, cryptfs, /dev/random, ACLs). It appears that the AA folks are sufficiently unimpressed with SELinux they want to do something different. I understand that there is a contingent that believes security == SELinux. There are also people who believe security == cryptography or security == virus scanners. I'm happy that they have found what works for them. Also, "just extend" implies that it would be easy to do. I suggest you go read the SELinux MLS code, and go read some of the discussions about getting MLS working for the RedHat LSP before you go throwing "just" around. Casey Schaufler [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
